Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 16:02:33 02/03/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 03, 2003 at 13:58:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 03, 2003 at 11:28:43, J Mike wrote: > >>On February 03, 2003 at 10:26:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >> >>>>All four games the computer played badly and got bad positions .. then defended >>>>bad positions well. >>> >>> >>>I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I think that for any move by white >>>you care to criticize (a3, h3) you can back up one or two moves and find two >>>by black that deserve criticism... >>> >>>White had _all_ the winning chances in this game, black was looking at a draw >>>at best for almost the entire game. >> >>This is completely incorrect. White played the position real badly (not just >>according to me but according to GMs like Fedorowich and others) .. Black (not >>white) had real chances of winning if he played more agressively with b5 or >>maybe d5 > > >I'm not sure what _they_ were seeing. But the GM/IM commentary on ICC favored >white for almost all of the game. particularly after the passed b-pawn was >created... Black >wasn't _ever_ going to win that position. But that is already much later. He meant b5 or d5 earlier. The forth game is the clearest proof for promotion help. In boxing they say sparring partner. Rolf Tueschen
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.